From a tech point of view, this isn't something new. I am sure Windows 7 updates have the capacity to delete data, just like Ubuntu updates have the ability to remove files from any place on your computer. It is just that Ubuntu updates only meddle with settings in system files, and this is so because Canonical isn't run by mentally greedy maniacs.

The bigger problem is when you tie this to a specific app and then not only prevent users from using the app, but also remove any potentially valuable information.

I am not sure this is a "Mind Blow", but it will be like pretty much everything else MS have done, their users are screwed and can do very little about it.

skierkyles

December 10th, 2011, 04:01 AM

From a tech point of view, this isn't something new. I am sure Windows 7 updates have the capacity to delete data, just like Ubuntu updates have the ability to remove files from any place on your computer. It is just that Ubuntu updates only meddle with settings in system files, and this is so because Canonical isn't run by mentally greedy maniacs.

Microsoft's plan....

Step 1. Delete data from customers computers

Step 2. ?????

Step 3. PROFIT!

3Miro

December 10th, 2011, 04:39 AM

Microsoft's plan....

Step 1. Delete data from customers computers

Step 2. ?????

Step 3. PROFIT!

The ability to delete data isn't new, however, for MS to put this in now means that they are legally covering themselves in case they do it ... which means they expect to do nuke someone.

MS has pretty much reached a point where they can hardly make any more money than what they already do. Right now, their biggest problem is to keep their monopoly stable and for that they need not profits, but control.

Have you seen a legitimate machine locked by an MS Genuine Disadvantage false-positive? This is taking it to a whole other level.

Thewhistlingwind

December 10th, 2011, 05:04 AM

Microsoft's plan....

Step 1. Delete data from customers computers

Step 2. ?????

Step 3. PROFIT!

It doesn't matter what step 2 (Or 3 for that matter) is. The fact that step one is happening is enough for it to be alarming. If they include this in the terms, and never use it, that still doesn't make it okay.

Quadunit404

December 10th, 2011, 05:42 AM

So you're saying that if I get Windows 8 and my apps vanish, Windows 8 it? :lolflag:

Bad jokes aside, this IS necessary if you're running an app store. Why does this surprise you?

ViperChief

December 10th, 2011, 06:05 AM

Just don't buy things from the Windows store. Problem solved.

3Miro

December 10th, 2011, 06:07 AM

So you're saying that if I get Windows 8 and my apps vanish, Windows 8 it? :lolflag:

Not bad, I actually like the joke.

Bad jokes aside, this IS necessary if you're running an app store. Why does this surprise you?
How is it necessary for the owner of the store to be able to delete some of the user's files. This is like Canonical getting in fight with LibreOffice and then deciding to add an update that removes LibreOffice and deletes all of your documents. Why would that be a necessary feature? Canonical can currently do that, but they don't have a disclaimer about it because they have no intention of ever doing it.

3Miro

December 10th, 2011, 06:08 AM

Just don't buy Windows. Problem solved.

Fixed it for you.

KiwiNZ

December 10th, 2011, 10:15 AM

Very poor journalism (journalism used for want of a better narrative) Windows 8 does not exist yet, Windows 8 Developer pre-beta exists with a Beta rumored soon.

Until Windows 8 retail is available this really does not exist.

ViperChief

December 10th, 2011, 01:40 PM

Fixed it for you.

Very true. All this getting up in arms over something you choose to agree to. If you don't like the product or the license, don't buy it. Simple as that. No one is forcing anyone to buy anything.

ViperChief

December 10th, 2011, 01:45 PM

Very poor journalism (journalism used for want of a better narrative) Windows 8 does not exist yet, Windows 8 Developer pre-beta exists with a Beta rumored soon.

Until Windows 8 retail is available this really does not exist.

Well, it was ZDNet...we can't be too surprised with their quality of journalism.

Trashwindows

December 10th, 2011, 01:50 PM

My thoughts your words :)

F.G.

December 10th, 2011, 02:53 PM

here's another article about it, which compares it with people like apple and google:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/245797/microsoft_we_can_remotely_delete_windows_8_apps.ht ml
this is the bit from the user agreement which i love:
"you may not be able to run apps or access content that you previously acquired or purchased a license for"

CharlesA

December 10th, 2011, 03:26 PM

Sounds like the way Apple and Google handle their app store tbh.

Linuxratty

December 10th, 2011, 04:32 PM

"you may not be able to run apps or access content that you previously acquired or purchased a license for"

And people wonder why I run Linux?

Simian Man

December 10th, 2011, 04:47 PM

It's possible on Debian-based systems to do an update, or install a package, and have it remove another package from your system. But nobody worries about it. Just because this is Microsoft, people freak out and claim some shadowy nefarious purpose.

Windows 8 will not indiscriminately delete user's files and y'all are silly for thinking so.

Copper Bezel

December 10th, 2011, 04:50 PM

How is it necessary for the owner of the store to be able to delete some of the user's files. This is like Canonical getting in fight with LibreOffice and then deciding to add an update that removes LibreOffice and deletes all of your documents. Why would that be a necessary feature? Canonical can currently do that, but they don't have a disclaimer about it because they have no intention of ever doing it.
That example is a bit on the nose, given the update that replaced OpenOffice with Libreoffice.

The "data" in "apps and data" is (1) paid content (for situations like the inappropriately sold Amazon e-books) or (2) data tied to specific apps which are themselves discontinued for security (or "other") reasons. It's not the portable, non-DRM'd files those of us in the Linux world are using exclusively in the first place.

It's also just another reminder that buying a non-Linux computer never really means owning it, but that's aside.

CharlesA

December 10th, 2011, 05:59 PM

It's possible on Debian-based systems to do an update, or install a package, and have it remove another package from your system. But nobody worries about it. Just because this is Microsoft, people freak out and claim some shadowy nefarious purpose.

Windows 8 will not indiscriminately delete user's files and y'all are silly for thinking so.

That's pretty much it. Bit of a double standard there, right?

The "data" in "apps and data" is (1) paid content (for situations like the inappropriately sold Amazon e-books) or (2) data tied to specific apps which are themselves discontinued for security (or "other") reasons. It's not the portable, non-DRM'd files those of us in the Linux world are using exclusively in the first place.

This is true. That's the way it works in the Android Market and the Apple app store (and Amazon's store, obviously, since they deal in ebooks).

madjr

December 10th, 2011, 06:14 PM

Some countries were already worried about previous windows versions, but win8 really hit it in the nail :p

F.G.

December 10th, 2011, 06:40 PM

so, i think the difference in the licences is important here.
Ubuntu and linux users use the product because they trust the supplier. i mean its written gnu licence that they aren't liable for anything. Even if it wasn't I don't think that linux would be covered under the 'Sale of Goods an Services Act' (at least in the UK) as it's free.
so, canonical and the linux foundation can do whatever they like without it being illegal.

in contrast to that Microsoft do sell a product, so they are writing this capability into their licence. The problem I have is that i don't trust Microsoft, i mean i don't trust them not to get into some patent war, pull an app, and then i've lost a bunch of DRM stuff i've paid for (particularly if the app is obscure and will only effect a small group of people) and then have to go through a tedious process of getting my money back. basically I'm afraid of them wasting my time.

i rarely actually use windows, so for me the point is fairly academic.

beew

December 10th, 2011, 06:50 PM

Originally Posted by Simian Man http://ubuntuforums.org/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=11527643#post11527643)
It's possible on Debian-based systems to do an update, or install a package, and have it remove another package from your system.
It is possible for compatiblity reasons, but not your data.

But nobody worries about it. Just because this is Microsoft, people freak out and claim some shadowy nefarious purpose.Yeah, that it is MS is a very good reason to be concerned.

Windows 8 will not indiscriminately delete user's files and y'all are silly for thinking so.So what kind of "discrimination" do you think would make MS deleting your files acceptible?

KiraLexi

December 10th, 2011, 07:09 PM

It is possible for compatiblity reasons, but not your data.
Yeah, that it is MS is a very good reason to be concerned.

So what kind of "discrimination" do you think would make MS deleting your files acceptible?

The obvious answer is malware. Google has done the same thing with Android, and there was a lot less paranoia - because apparently Google is so much more trustworthy.

Bodsda

December 10th, 2011, 07:15 PM

I think in general, this is a fairly reasonable statement to put in the Terms of Use for an App Store. The only parts I disagree with are the automatic removal and the 'we may refund'. Promise a refund, and prompt for acceptance of the removal and this would be fine.

beew

December 10th, 2011, 07:20 PM

The obvious answer is malware. Google has done the same thing with Android, and there was a lot less paranoia - because apparently Google is so much more trustworthy.

I wonder what does MS consider "malware" (maybe torrent files?) If you run virus scans with AVs usually there is a prompt asking the user what to do with suspicious files before actions are taken (no action is one option) Files should only be removed with the users' explicit authorization.

What Google does is not an excuse for MS, and at least to this point Computers are not locked down devices like smart phone, even though MS apparently wants to make them so with its "secure boot" requirement for WIndows 8 certification (which is already compromised btw)

inobe

December 10th, 2011, 07:32 PM

it's nice to see that microsoft wants to compete, this is better than their typical ways of competing, stepping on everyone's toes, then they will actually become more useful.

i have yet seen anything innovative or at least original, besides the xbox, now if they would just make windows secure like their xbox, that'll be a massive triumph, but the malware makers will lose big $$$, microsoft, if you read this.. malware is getting dated!

removing data can be a good thing if they shot out a memo afterwords with a detailed explanation...

Dr. C

December 10th, 2011, 07:52 PM

The issue here is informed consent. What Microsoft is doing here is requiring a blanket consent as a condition of using the operating system or application store because consent on a case by case basis may not be forthcoming if the reason for the "upgrade" is add what RMS would call "malicious features" for example DRM or removing an application or content that the user may wish to keep. There are may examples of this including the famously Orwellian removal of 1984 by Amazon from the Kindle or the downgrading of the PS/3 by SONY to remove the ability to install GNU / Linux.

The Ubuntu upgrade situation is fundamentally different because consent can be given or withheld on a case by case basis. One grants consent when one enters the sudo password. The same can be said for pre-DRM versions of Windows for example Windows NT Workstation 4.

An application store has no more need for this kind of blanket consent than a bookseller would have to require a key to your home and your permission to enter your home in the middle of the night to remove a book they have sold you, as a condition of the sale.

Thewhistlingwind

December 10th, 2011, 09:37 PM

The issue here is informed consent.

Exactly. It's not a "tech" sin. After all, any time you update your system your essentially handing your distro provider the keys.

It's more a social one, to sell a product and then put "blanket consent" (As you so nicely put it.) in the EULA for content removal, with "You MIGHT be refunded" as recourse.

KiwiNZ

December 10th, 2011, 09:53 PM

The issue here is informed consent. What Microsoft is doing here is requiring a blanket consent as a condition of using the operating system or application store because consent on a case by case basis may not be forthcoming if the reason for the "upgrade" is add what RMS would call "malicious features" for example DRM or removing an application or content that the user may wish to keep. There are may examples of this including the famously Orwellian removal of 1984 by Amazon from the Kindle or the downgrading of the PS/3 by SONY to remove the ability to install GNU / Linux.

The Ubuntu upgrade situation is fundamentally different because consent can be given or withheld on a case by case basis. One grants consent when one enters the sudo password. The same can be said for pre-DRM versions of Windows for example Windows NT Workstation 4.

An application store has no more need for this kind of blanket consent than a bookseller would have to require a key to your home and your permission to enter your home in the middle of the night to remove a book they have sold you, as a condition of the sale.

No, a condition of using the App store on the pre-release versions. The App store is not compulsory.

Windows 8 is not retail yet therefore it is all optional.

Use of Windows 8 will not be compulsory. When it is released if you don't like the terms and conditions...... don't use it, simple really.

Bottom line it's not reality yet and if you want to use the services you have to agree to the rules like most things in life.

Thewhistlingwind

December 10th, 2011, 10:11 PM

No, a condition of using the App store on the pre-release versions. The App store is not compulsory.

Bottom line it's not reality yet and if you want to use the services you have to agree to the rules like most things in life.

Your right it's not reality yet. Neither are most dystopic novels, that doesn't stop us from discussing them.

And in this case, these ARE the beta terms, and I don't think that it's at all a stretch of the imagination to expect them to be the same in the final release.

EDIT: PRE-beta terms.

Quadunit404

December 10th, 2011, 10:11 PM

No, a condition of using the App store on the pre-release versions. The App store is not compulsory.

Windows 8 is not retail yet therefore it is all optional.

Use of Windows 8 will not be compulsory. When it is released if you don't like the terms and conditions...... don't use it, simple really.

Bottom line it's not reality yet and if you want to use the services you have to agree to the rules like most things in life.

Good point. Also, remember that Windows 7 is supported until 2020 - so if you really want to stick to it as your Windows release (either for gaming or that one must-have application that just won't run under Wine), you can for the next 9 years.

t0p

December 10th, 2011, 10:22 PM

If you don't Microsoft messing with your computer, don't have any Windows OS running o said machine.

I have a virtual XP, which i fire up through VBox when I want to use my printer. Otherwise, no Windows touches my computer's lips outside of the VBox sandbox. And all is well.

As for the complaint "Windoes 8 lets Microsoft remove data without your consent"... I very much doubt that. Take a good look at the EULA. Microsoft's EULAs are famous for letting anyone doing anything they want.

Dr. C

December 10th, 2011, 11:02 PM

No, a condition of using the App store on the pre-release versions. The App store is not compulsory.

The App store is proposed to be the sole source for Metro apps. Basically the Apple iPad/iPhone/iPod model.

Windows 8 is not retail yet therefore it is all optional.

The whole point of a Developer Release, Alpha, Beta etc is to get feedback on your product before it goes gold. It is also the most appropriate time to provide feedback.

Use of Windows 8 will not be compulsory. When it is released if you don't like the terms and conditions...... don't use it, simple really.

Many will disagree with this. Not me though. The obvious alternative is GNU / Linux including Ubuntu. I switched to Ubuntu as my primary OS in summer of 2006 for this very reason. Let us say I did not like the "vista" on the horizon at the time. As far as I am concerned DRM breaks the trust between a software developer and its users. As Microsoft moves deeper and deeper into the dark side with their support for DRM they become less and less trustworthy. GNU / Linux has moved in the other direction thanks to GPL v3 as the GPL v3 is very toxic to DRM. GPL v3 is the smartest move the FSF has made in a long time.

Bottom line it's not reality yet and if you want to use the services you have to agree to the rules like most things in life.

Of course and if one does not like the rules one can take one's business elsewhere and let the market pass its verdict.

KiwiNZ

December 11th, 2011, 01:21 AM

the title of this thread is incorrect, when you agree to the Terms of use you give your consent.
The is not covert they are up front with it.

http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows/store-terms-of-use

"
Thank you for choosing Microsoft and the Windows Store. The Windows Store is a feature of the Windows operating system and is an Internet-based service. Itís subject to the Software License Terms for your Windows operating system, as well as this additional agreement thatís specific to your use of the Windows Store. Please read this agreement carefully. By using the Windows Store, you accept its terms and consent to the transmission of certain information as described in these Terms of Use.

Please note that this agreement allows us to remove applications from your Windows 8 Beta enabled device in certain circumstances. See the Can Microsoft remove apps or data from my device? section below for more details."

3Miro

December 11th, 2011, 02:22 AM

the title of this thread is incorrect, when you agree to the Terms of use you give your consent.
The is not covert they are up front with it.

http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows/store-terms-of-use

"
Thank you for choosing Microsoft and the Windows Store. The Windows Store is a feature of the Windows operating system and is an Internet-based service. Itís subject to the Software License Terms for your Windows operating system, as well as this additional agreement thatís specific to your use of the Windows Store. Please read this agreement carefully. By using the Windows Store, you accept its terms and consent to the transmission of certain information as described in these Terms of Use.

Please note that this agreement allows us to remove applications from your Windows 8 Beta enabled device in certain circumstances. See the Can Microsoft remove apps or data from my device? section below for more details."

The HUMAN-CENTiPAD:

http://www.southparkstudios.com/full-episodes/s15e01-humancentipad

There is a big difference between: "we have the ability to erase data", "we would like to erase data: stop/proceed" and "data erased: what do you mean you wanted to make a backup first".

KiwiNZ

December 11th, 2011, 02:38 AM

The HUMAN-CENTiPAD:

http://www.southparkstudios.com/full-episodes/s15e01-humancentipad

There is a big difference between: "we have the ability to erase data", "we would like to erase data: stop/proceed" and "data erased: what do you mean you wanted to make a backup first".

Again, optional

fibster

December 11th, 2011, 02:49 AM

there are too many back doors in microsoft software to keep track of us. not appreciated

iiiears

December 11th, 2011, 02:55 AM

The obvious answer is malware. Google has done the same thing with Android, and there was a lot less paranoia - because apparently Google is so much more trustworthy.

Once the ability is given to remove applications the problem becomes politics.

China doesn't like your DNS/Proxy. Malaysia doesn't like your portrayal of women or it's officials. The U.S. would like you to consume from the web but not copy anything.

Large organisations everywhere concentrate power and then find they don't have enough of it.

Pogo was right.

Dr. C

December 11th, 2011, 03:16 AM

Once the ability is given to remove applications the problem becomes politics.

China doesn't like your DNS/Proxy. Malaysia doesn't like your portrayal of women or it's officials. The U.S. would like you to consume from the web but not copy anything.

Large organisations everywhere concentrate power and then find they don't have enough of it.

Pogo was right.

It is not just politics. Pick any topic that has any possible controversy, including those that for good reason are not allowed on Ubuntu Forums. Now censor one side of the debate. Even better then change you mind and censor the other side. No matter how well intentioned the gatekeepers of the "walled garden", Microsoft, Apple, Amazon etc are, they will get caught in the middle of the crossfire. It is a business model that will come to haunt these companies big time. They chose to place themselves on the firing line of both sides of every controversial issue worldwide all in the name of DRM.

CharlesA

December 11th, 2011, 03:26 AM

there are too many back doors in microsoft software to keep track of us. not appreciated
Source? Else it's just FUD.

It is not just politics. Pick any topic that has any possible controversy, including those that for good reason are not allowed on Ubuntu Forums. Now censor one side of the debate. Even better then change you mind and censor the other side. No matter how well intentioned the gatekeepers of the "walled garden", Microsoft, Apple, Amazon etc are, they will get caught in the middle of the crossfire. It is a business model that will come to haunt these companies big time. They chose to place themselves on the firing line of both sides of every controversial issue worldwide all in the name of DRM.